Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Driftin N Dreamin Date: Mar 27, 2007 8:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

Phil did not exactly deplore it, he put out a couple of statements. The first saying that he didn't like the way it was handled and sort of washing his hands of the decision. The second statement saying that he was actually the one who raised the issue with the rest of the band. I am still not exactly sure where he stands on the issue. Here are the pertinent sections of his statements regarding LMA.


November 30, 2005
An Announcement from Phil Lesh:

It was brought to my attention that all of the Grateful Dead shows were
taken down from Archive.org right before Thanksgiving. I was not part of
this decision making process and was not notified that the shows were to be
pulled. I do feel that the music is the Grateful Dead's legacy and I hope
that one way or another all of it is available for those who want it . I
have enjoyed using Archive.org and found it invaluable during the writing of
my book. I found myself being pulled back in time listening to old Grateful
Dead shows while giggling with glee or feeling that ache in my heart
listening to Jerry's poetic guitar and sweet voice.

We are musicians not businessmen and have made good and bad decisions on our
journey. We do love and care about our community as you helped us make the
music. We could not have made this kind of music without you as you allowed
us to play "without a net". Your love, trust and patience made it possible
for us to try again the next show when we couldn't get that magic carpet off
the ground. Your concerns have been heard and I am sure are being
respectfully addressed.
- Phil


His second statement is a little more ambiguous.

Archive - I had two conversations with Cameron Sears, our CEO at GDP, regarding Archive, starting when our material first showed up there. I told Cameron that I was fine having the audience tapes up there, but that he should talk to everyone, including Bob Hunter and John Barlow, regarding the soundboards. A year later when I had not heard anything about the boards, I mentioned to Cameron that I felt by not doing anything we were making a decision about the boards and that I was fine with that. Again I urged him to talk to everyone. I was caught by complete surprise when, right before Thanksgiving, the recordings were pulled. I feel that Bobby was not updated properly and unfairly took most of the heat. A lot of our business disagreements are the result of poor communication from advisors. Bobby is my brother and I love him unconditionally; he is a very generous man, and was unfairly judged regarding the Archive issue.

In the end, what we want or enjoy in life comes down to personal preference; the best and the bravest will always follow their own path in their listening, in their reading, in their thinking, without any concern for the opinions of others.

Words of comfort whispered to the injured, words of courage whispered to the scared, words of encouragement whispered to a child, words of love whispered to the sky.

Words have great power; use them wisely.

- PHIL

Just to refresh people's memories here are a couple of links to the LMA discussions at the time.

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=49370

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=53318




Barlow, on the other hand has been consistent in condemning the move and has not been reluctant, over the last 1 1/2 yrs or so, to voice his opinion on this matter.

I also agree with Highroller, Colbert himself is not upset about the availability of the videos on You Tube. Everything he does is parody and you pretty much have to take what he says and realize that he feels the exact opposite.



This post was modified by Driftin N Dreamin on 2007-03-27 15:25:01

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: BryanE Date: Mar 27, 2007 8:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

I appreciate your posting Phil's comments, particularly how he expressed his relationship and feelings regarding Mr. Weir. It's not unusual for me to put myself in the position of defending Bob against various naysayers, not only here, but on other Grateful Dead discussion boards, too. As far as the subject at hand is concerned, there is what I perceive to be a huge misconception among a number of people that Weir is some kind of greedy despot and major league jerk who doesn't give a damn about his fans. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I, for one, believe that the Dead Head community, such as it is, could benefit from a lot less effort from those who claim to be "fans" to find something to bitch and piss and moan about, and a lot more appreciation for the incredible music that Bob, Phil, and everyone else have given us for more than 40 years.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Mar 28, 2007 3:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

BryanE:

not that i necessarily disagree with you, but the flip side of that coin is the fans claim, "without no audience there ain't no show"

it would appear that each side of the same coin wishes to believe that they can now exist mutually exclusive from one another...hence the ill feelings all around

as with any conflict, resolution is not likely to commence until both sides are ready to cease their "F--- you and your entitlement attitude" posturing

...thoughts?

This post was modified by midnight sun on 2007-03-28 10:12:50

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ghostofpig Date: Mar 28, 2007 7:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

The audience pays its money and gets its show. That is commerce. With the Dead, they also got their own show, which they mistook for the Dead's show. Being there did not mean you got a free t-shirt or a free anything. You paid for it. WHy should you be entitled to free soundboards? (Audience is a different issue). Pay for ticket, pay for shirt, pay for tape.

The tapes, which were made by the Dead's crew, are theirs. What they do with them is their business. I think that their is a mistake in thinking that just because they have become available for download means that this was the band's intention. A huge percentage of these tapes were leaked via Gans or Latvalia or Lemieux--not by the band or their management.

Historically, the Dead are the most generous band in the world when it comes to tapes. Other bands, beginning with Pearl Jam, realized that they could sell cds or downloads of each concert right after it was performed. This prevented bootlegging and allowed the fans full access to good boards--for a fair price. Money for music.
There's generosity and there is corporate reality. I agree with Phil that these are a bunch of ill informed musicians who rely on others to advise them.

It would be one thing to see some of my material floating on the net and keeping my fans happy. It would be another to wake up and see almost all of it out there. Who owns the tapes--the sbds?--the Dead. Who uploaded them to archive? Not the Dead. I don't think that it was strictly about money as much as it was about artistic integrity. Over time, all sorts of stuff leaks out from various bands--but not their whole calatogue! Too much too fast.

Can you imagine what the stones would do if all their sbd recordings escaped out onto the net? Sure--there are a few--especially broadcasts and semi-released stuff--but you won't find whole tours. I guarantee that if things progressed in their part of the forest, heads would roll.

Another statement from Phil concerned the fact that he browsed the archive to review tapes for his book. The implication--the statement--was that the archive is a good thing. His approval seemed to be more than tacit. He has always stood on the side of the deadhead and against the corporate clampdowns.

I, too, don't fault Bobby. I think that if my tapes were removed or restricted and the folks that had enjoyed the benefit of their availability acted as angry children who felt that the material was THEIRS, I'd be a mite pissed of, too. The real fans say "thank you" not "fuck you." I feel that the entitled reaction of a handful of self-centered assholes created more of a mess than the band did. And it made heads look bad. What happened to the Grateful part of the Dead scene?

The whole thing was a mess. But it's like anything else. If the powers that be look away and let you bend the law, don't go so far as to force their hand to slap you down. They don't want to, but there is always a point where they must or they give up all control.


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: smi2les Date: Mar 28, 2007 8:24am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

Maybe they were seized in a raid somewhere with an attempt to float an old culture's lifestyle, but we are at war and this is what started last time.

Like old timers are going to stand in line for felonies.

SSDD.....someone's starting the same crap, hence 69'....George Dickel if you please, Police Tour or Big and Fat tour......who's gang bang is bigger.

Someone forgot to stay in their own movie.

DEATH DON'T HAVE NO MERCY was about NAM.......are we going to focus in the mirror, see the reflection, and react wisely ?

"Knowledge comes from the past, Wisdom's from the future"
Native American Indian Quote

This post was modified by smi2les on 2007-03-28 15:24:01

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 28, 2007 3:55pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

your arguement is perfect ghost - just wish the 'suits" with the dead would do what Pearl Jam is. PJ sells their shows for a pittance. We still pay 22 bucks for a dead show. That is the dead's choice and i will not fault them for that - could care less in fact - with the amount of dl's out there excluding the archive it is pointless to shell out another penny if i should choose not too.

pearl jam, on the other hand, i actually respect more. they attacked the issue - offered cds AND downloads dirt cheap (never mind the concerts) - and that was that - much much much brighter. but of course - Eddie Vedder et al are much smarter than the dead and their waybegone management (sorry to say). Vedder is smart - the dead????? the proof is in the pudding.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Mar 28, 2007 1:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

as always, a very lucid take on a nasty situation Mr. Ghost

"The whole thing was a mess."

and it still is...the band, the fans...you can't have one without the other...and there isn't enough of either to afford the loss of many (1 in 10,000?)

while equally cherishing both sides of the same coin, it saddens me to realize that neither side can see each other's

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: BryanE Date: Mar 28, 2007 2:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

midnight sun-

I was well on my way to issuing a reply earlier when I hit the wrong key and dumped the whole thing.

ghost of pig pretty much said it all.

I suppose you’re right that there would be no show without an audience, but for the sake of argument, it might be fair to say, then, that when the show is over, and the audience and the musicians are no longer interacting as cooperative units, their partnership ceases. If audience members want to then have ownership of recordings made that night of applause, cheering, and some yahoo who keeps screaming for the band to play St. Stephen, they’re welcome to them. But the decision about ownership of the music that was produced that night should then remain with the band. At least that’s how I see it. If they want to let us listen to it here on the LMA without restrictions, on a restricted basis, or not hear it on sites like this at all is a decision that should be left to the party/parties who created the music. Any other claim is presumptuous.

My biggest gripe, again, is about the griping itself. If I read a post from one more spoiled brat calling Bobby Weir a “fucking greedy asshole” for having the audacity to express an opinion about what should be done with what he produced with his own sweat and inspiration, I’m going to blow a gasket. It IS a question of entitlement and the assumed right to it that a faction of snot-nosed ingrates believe they have, which they do not. I am deeply offended by this sort of thing, as I believe anyone with a measurable level of sensitivity should be. I have been fortunate to meet Bobby Weir on a couple of different occasions. He is not a “fucking asshole,” greedy or otherwise, and any of these greedy bastards who label him as such don’t have the first clue about the truth, about being decent human beings, and are just plain mean. That ain’t right. Bobby Weir is a really nice guy, gracious, polite, funny and very intelligent, and he has every right to be an active part of the decision-making process with regard to anything that has the name Grateful Dead on it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Mar 28, 2007 3:39pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

BryanE:

thanks for your response and clarifications

although i don't feel any particular personal sense of entitlement, i believe this issue is far from black and white, especially in GD's case

thanks for your insights regarding Mr. Wier, i don't believe he intended for this division to take place...i truly wish him, the Dead, LMA and all of the fans the best

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Mar 28, 2007 2:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

The band members have every right to do whatever they choose with their product--the music. It is theirs, they made it, and if they want to place restrictions on its availability, that is their right.

That being said:

It is also, I believe, a fair assesment to say that in this particular instance, Weir was playing the role of the cop who stops you for speeding when you're 5 miles per hour over the speed limit.

He is right, you are wrong. You were technically speeding. But he didn't have to give you that ticket. He could have looked the other way, b/c after all, what you are doing, while technically outside the bounds of the law, isn't THAT much outside the bounds.

In other words, since we all know that the genie is well out of the bottle, and that if one REALLY craves DL SBD copies of shows, with a little effort, it cannot be stopped.

That Bobby stopped it in its easiest, least troublesome form (this archive) is perfectly within his rights, but ultimately fruitless, and given the band's long-time stance of encouraging tapings of shows and the circulation of said shows [which, btw, helped them become the live juggernaut money-making machine they were, so the fans deserve some credit here] can be interpreted fairly by some as a petty, and to put it more bluntly, kind of dickish move.

Just like that cop who stopped you for doing 40 in a 35 mph zone.

Yes, there is the entitlement whine of claiming the music is somehow "ours" (it is not), but there is another train of thought that falls somewhere in the middle and wonders fairly if Garcia would have had the same reaction as Weir did.

Not to mention the fact that every true Dead Head I know of was only too happy to support the band through official merchandise purchasing of Dicks Picks and many other paraphenalia, and never would complain about any official release being verbotten for DL on the LMA.

My 2 cents on this subject yet again, but I never get tired of it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ghostofpig Date: Mar 28, 2007 1:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

These waters are deep, muddy, fast, and treacherous, and have been waded in over and over, only to cause much drowning and vomiting from their poison.

I can understand both points of view. Once the horse is out of the barn and all that. BUT I cannot abide by the argument that somehow one is entitled to something just because they are a fan and bought a lot of tickets. That just doesn't make sense. That argument is morally flawed.

I think the bottom line is that you can't really have it both ways. The Dead erred in letting sbds out in the first place--erred, I say, in corporate hindsight. However, the goodwill engendered by letting those very boards out has done much to increase their fanbase over the years--much to keep the faithful faithful. The sword cuts both ways.

You and I have no "rights" to these tapes. But once they are set loose, the "rights" of the band are diluted. I truly believe that no one anticipated the digital realm of the internet. No more hissy tapes. Just click and load and burn--all day long. Pick a gig, any gig. When it was just some heads trading cassettes, it was fun and innocuous. Only a few folks had this or that and they traded. Then came the net. First a few here and a few there; then suddenly tons of stuff appeared through the back door in pristine form, lovingly remastered by techies. When over a few years time a hundred tapes became a thousand--the treat became a threat. Too much too fast. Why buy the cow if the milk's free? Besides, if there are only a few of an item, the sudden appearance of a thousand of them diminishes their market value. To the suits, enough became enough. I can understand that.

Still: you try to marry a bunch of freewheeling musicians to a corporate mindset and you get . . . . nowhere. Confusion sets in and arguments start, and we are all neck deep in the big muddy river once again.

On the other hand--why are you giving away the milk if you plan to sell the cow? It's a bit late to put the lid back on Pandora's box. Bad planning? Yes. It took years before anyone realized that they could sell these tapes; by then it was too late to stop the tide of internet downloading.

Their corporate foolishness is our hippy-happy gain.

BUT please (I point No fingers at anyone here) do not tell me that you or we are somehow "entitled" to these tapes as we are "entitled" to breathe the air around us. Entitlement is something granted, not something taken.

But--you can still get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant!!!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: high flow Date: Mar 28, 2007 2:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

BUT, you can't dl Alice's Restaurant for free...an that is the way it should be.

You still have to give in order to receive....that part never changed!

I'm not sure who feels entitled to this stuff...I just feel blessed, like the luckiest of all dogs!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: midnight sun Date: Mar 28, 2007 3:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless John Barlow

the live recording entitlement issue is murky at best in a legal sense, not even relevant in a practical sense, and when applied to the context of GD sdb's it gets downright filthy

this subject intrigues me, i have been following it closely for a year and a half and despite growing up in a family of artists i cannot honestly say there is a right, or a wrong...but i can state for certain that there is cause and effect...and considering how poorly both sides handled their causes, it is the effect that now concerns me


anything?...i'll have a burnt weenie sandwich with fries...
on the house of course ;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ghostofpig Date: Mar 28, 2007 3:56pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless Uncle Meat

As long as that sandwich is fast and bulbous.

There's a great disc!

Yeah--to me the shame of it all was the poor behavior evidenced on all sides. We are truly blessed to have had a grateful dead, to have experienced a grateful dead, and to be able to hear so much great music. The rest of it is bullshit.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: smi2les Date: Mar 28, 2007 4:28pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: God Bless Uncle Meat

Can I have a bite off your McRib ?

http://www.archive.org/details/porkeys_midnight_matinee

This post was modified by smi2les on 2007-03-28 23:28:28